Despite everyone's perception of sound being different (ie. what is good and what is bad), I think if one cannot tell the sonic difference between an iPod and DX90 in a double-blind test, with lossless format and same headphones level-matched...

Then the person must have some sort of issue with their hearing, I mean quite literally.. the difference in sound is just day and night!!

Just my 2 cents..

I couldn't agree more with you. The only scenario where an iPod and a DX90 could sound kind of close is when using really poor headphones that messes all the "musicality" of these devices (like the ones used for watching movies during a flight) and poor MP3 songs.

As I said earlier, the DX50 already sounds awesome compare to my iPad Air, but if you have got a decent pair of IEMs or cans, then the DX90 takes your music one step (or two) further in terms of clarity, musicality, details etc Not to mention that when used 24 bits or/and .APE well recorded songs, the difference can be huge.

I did this trial with my mum. I played her favourite song from the 80's and she prefered the musicality and voices definition of the iBasso, although she stated the sound from the iPad was good too. But then, my mum doesnt like loud music and she would probably not buy an iBasso (or a good pair of IEMs) for the solely purpose of listening to good music...

Just as a completely off-the-wall review would excite some comments, so should it also be ok to point out that there is atleast a *possibility* that some of the "huge differences" may not truly exist. It wont change anyone's mind but for someone who is starting out or unsure, it is good to get both sides of the discussion.

However, I agree - the point should just be made, and then we can move on, b/c there is nothing to be endlessly gained with those discussions. I have yet to see anyone ever change their mind based on this.

So in the interest of that, let me point out that i doubt the validity of the claims about "night and day differences" and I've been listening to high-end audio since 1997. Remove visual cues, match levels precisely and 99% of the perceived differences disappear. If someone else disagrees, good for them - I have no desire to convert someone who's mind is made up.

And getting back to the DX90 - I finally managed to clean up the tags on 300+ albums and it has scanned them properly. One good thing about the DX90's interface - once you flick the screen and get the albums rolling, it keeps rolling. Which is kind convenient when you want to get to something that starts with T or V.

Fix that blasted ID3 tagging and their inability to handle things like Album Artist and Composer, add a second micro-SD card and you've got the perfect DAP.

Despite everyone's perception of sound being different (ie. what is good and what is bad), I think if one cannot tell the sonic difference between an iPod and DX90 in a double-blind test, with lossless format and same headphones level-matched...

Then the person must have some sort of issue with their hearing, I mean quite literally.. the difference in sound is just day and night!!

Just my 2 cents..

Quote:

Originally Posted by RuRu

I couldn't agree more with you. The only scenario where an iPod and a DX90 could sound kind of close is when using really poor headphones that messes all the "musicality" of these devices (like the ones used for watching movies during a flight) and poor MP3 songs.

As I said earlier, the DX50 already sounds awesome compare to my iPad Air, but if you have got a decent pair of IEMs or cans, then the DX90 takes your music one step (or two) further in terms of clarity, musicality, details etc Not to mention that when used 24 bits or/and .APE well recorded songs, the difference can be huge.

I did this trial with my mum. I played her favourite song from the 80's and she prefered the musicality and voices definition of the iBasso, although she stated the sound from the iPad was good too. But then, my mum doesnt like loud music and she would probably not buy an iBasso (or a good pair of IEMs) for the solely purpose of listening to good music...

Quote:

Originally Posted by vkalia

Just as a completely off-the-wall review would excite some comments, so should it also be ok to point out that there is atleast a *possibility* that some of the "huge differences" may not truly exist. It wont change anyone's mind but for someone who is starting out or unsure, it is good to get both sides of the discussion.

However, I agree - the point should just be made, and then we can move on, b/c there is nothing to be endlessly gained with those discussions. I have yet to see anyone ever change their mind based on this.

So in the interest of that, let me point out that i doubt the validity of the claims about "night and day differences" and I've been listening to high-end audio since 1997. Remove visual cues, match levels precisely and 99% of the perceived differences disappear. If someone else disagrees, good for them - I have no desire to convert someone who's mind is made up.

And getting back to the DX90 - I finally managed to clean up the tags on 300+ albums and it has scanned them properly. One good thing about the DX90's interface - once you flick the screen and get the albums rolling, it keeps rolling. Which is kind convenient when you want to get to something that starts with T or V.

Fix that blasted ID3 tagging and their inability to handle things like Album Artist and Composer, add a second micro-SD card and you've got the perfect DAP.

Forgives me for my poor English

I do agree too but not the "night and day differences", I owed the iPod touch 5 but is still unmatched to the DX90; The mid, treble, clarity, details and soundstage are all superior than the iPod touch and have cleaner and more control on the bass. iPod touch have more punchy bass for some equalizer setting, also personally felt that iPod's have more darker mids that some people will prefer and the Apple UI is always the best. And I also understand that some people when they first listening will say that DX90 sound weird or not better than the iPod, but when you do listen for some times you will feel that there is really big differences between them. I also own the HP-P1 and when connected to the iPod touch you can feel more smoother than the DX90 but again details and clarity DX90 is still the upper hand, I would say they have their own weak and strong points and love them both. But unfortunately my HP-P1 have a serious battery issue.

I do not own DX50 or the X3 so I really can't tell the differences between them and iPod, but what I read from the iBasso chinese forum one of their staff stated "if the DX50 not sounded better the the iPods than why we wasted so much time to design or even to built them?". I can't say I believe on it but is up to our ears to judge it.

Well back to DX90, I using my SE846 and DX90 drives it very well, the bass is very well control, the details are awesome is like you are listening in a concert hall alone, the instruments separation is really good!! Scanning my 64gb sd card is a bit slow and I'm not use to the UI, can't edit the playlist which I wanted to edit the tracks number. At the moment I using the Jriver Media to copy the songs to the DX90, anyone out there using any other Media Player or just copy and paste on it?

I didn't say all DAPs sounded the same, but I said DX90 is not better than ipods or any mp3 players out there as it sounds artificial like the rest of them with U shaped sound. As for the bass sounding clean, yes it sounds clean with no definition. The player lacks definition period. Compared to X5, clarity is there, but details are missing. Mid definition is lost basically. Oh well, I can return them, but for those that cannot, maybe purchasing based on few reviews is not the best choice, but hearing yourself.

I didn't say all DAPs sounded the same, but I said DX90 is not better than ipods or any mp3 players out there as it sounds artificial like the rest of them with U shaped sound. As for the bass sounding clean, yes it sounds clean with no definition. The player lacks definition period. Compared to X5, clarity is there, but details are missing. Mid definition is lost basically. Oh well, I can return them, but for those that cannot, maybe purchasing based on few reviews is not the best choice, but hearing yourself.

I disagree with you completely in all regards. And I can't even be bothered explaining myself because I'm too busy listening to how great my DX90 sounds.

I didn't say all DAPs sounded the same, but I said DX90 is not better than ipods or any mp3 players out there as it sounds artificial like the rest of them with U shaped sound. As for the bass sounding clean, yes it sounds clean with no definition. The player lacks definition period. Compared to X5, clarity is there, but details are missing. Mid definition is lost basically. Oh well, I can return them, but for those that cannot, maybe purchasing based on few reviews is not the best choice, but hearing yourself.

I'm really curious that are you getting a faulty machine? coz the impression from you and from others including me seems a bit different. Did you listen to another dx90 on some local store?

Look at DT250, that is neutral. I can't understand why you insist that the NT-6 is neutral. It just seem DX90 is revealing what NT-6 really sounded and you are just upset and pointing the fingers at the wrong direction.

I didn't say all DAPs sounded the same, but I said DX90 is not better than ipods or any mp3 players out there as it sounds artificial like the rest of them with U shaped sound. As for the bass sounding clean, yes it sounds clean with no definition. The player lacks definition period. Compared to X5, clarity is there, but details are missing. Mid definition is lost basically. Oh well, I can return them, but for those that cannot, maybe purchasing based on few reviews is not the best choice, but hearing yourself.

I somehow agree with you. When listening the DX90 HO at volume level 170 through my Yamaha HPH-MT220, the quality is not bad but not better than the HO of my MSI 17" notebook with generic Realtek integrated sound chip. It has good dynamic but the sound stage is narrow.

The DX90 LO when paired with a good amp, would justify its cost. I won't bother listening to the DX90 without my Arrow 4GEdited by borrego - 6/9/14 at 8:49am

I somehow agree with you. When listening the DX90 HO at volume level 170 through my Yamaha HPH-MT220, the quality is not bad but not batter than the HO of my MSI 17" notebook with generic Realtek integrated sound chip. It has good dynamic but thesound stage is narrow.

The DX90 LO when paired with a good amp, would justify its cost. I won't bother listening to the DX90 without my Arrow 4G

This is what I hear also. May try the LO, but with O2, it wasn't very good. I think the O2 smooths the sound as it sounds detailed with ODAC(I believe it's very bright and O2 neutralizes it), but with others less so. I'll get a hold of a different amp, probably Vorz to test out the DX90 LO more, but X5 LO is definitely good clean LO.

I somehow agree with you. When listening the DX90 HO at volume level 170 through my Yamaha HPH-MT220, the quality is not bad but not batter than the HO of my MSI 17" notebook with generic Realtek integrated sound chip. It has good dynamic but the sound stage is narrow.

The DX90 LO when paired with a good amp, would justify its cost. I won't bother listening to the DX90 without my Arrow 4G

Look at DT250, that is neutral. I can't understand why you insist that the NT-6 is neutral. It just seem DX90 is revealing what NT-6 really sounded and you are just upset and pointing the fingers at the wrong direction.

My highly rated jh13fp aren't dead neutral either. I'm sure the NT-6 are excellent and good enough as are your Roxannes. He doesn't want to acknowledge the midbass lift or high frequency emphasis but that's fine. They're close enough. At least with Roxannes, which have had mostly VG things said about it's sound, you can adjust the bass if you don't like it. I think my JH13s have extra low bass. Others would like more. All these are close enough where a cable change becomes a big deal. Nothing is perfect and SilverEars just prefers the interface with the X5. I can understand that. I just don't relate to his description of the DX90 and that's OK too. It's just getting belabored upon at this point.

To me the X5 had enough lower treble emphasis to be annoying. More so than if it were universally forward. Others will view that as added detail. My Anniversary 3 is not a shrinking violet and I found it more enjoyable. I also own a latter Ipad which is better sounding than laptop HOs, a couple of Ipod touches, a few Sansas, had an AK120 and nave listened to a few of the top others. The unit that sounded best to me is one I didn't own, the HM901 but I'd never carry something that big around. Really liked the combo of attributes of the AK120 and from memory, find the DX90 competes with what I got from that player. I'm still not sure that I prefer it after not having my AK120 for a while but the value equation obviously favors the DX90. I also found the X5 a bit large and heavy but within the limits of what I'd consider carrying about.

In terms of ui and size and weight, I prefer the DX90. I really want to like it as it seems more portable. Unfortunately, I prefer X5. I just tried the LO, or is that HO that is split into two and calling one LO as it has volume control and we know ES9018 chip has digital volume control? LO not clean as X5 LO. Still boosted bass, and don't hear changes. I'm hearing no better than ipod with bassboost.